Bugzilla – Bug 1168658
Kernel 5.x does not boot on Lenovo X201 (hangs at loading initial ram disc)
Last modified: 2020-04-06 06:39:34 UTC
When trying to start any 5.x kernel of the repos, or the live CD 15.2, the journey ends when trying to load initial ram disk. I posted this issue on a xmpp user list of lenovo and found people with a X201. The were able to confirm the kernel to hang during boot. I tried settings with nomodeset and secureboot deactivate. One does not get any output, feedback or log, it "just hangs". (refer also to the originating thread in bug 1163486 (https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1163486) here comment 19 to 25.
confirmed to be valid on other independent hardware via a live CD of 15.2
on a Thinkpad X250 it was possible to boot the live CD
(In reply to Stakanov Schufter from comment #0) > When trying to start any 5.x kernel of the repos, or the live CD 15.2, the > journey ends when trying to load initial ram disk. > > I posted this issue on a xmpp user list of lenovo and found people with a > X201. The were able to confirm the kernel to hang during boot. > > I tried settings with > nomodeset and secureboot deactivate. > > One does not get any output, feedback or log, it "just hangs". > (refer also to the originating thread in bug 1163486 > (https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1163486) here comment 19 to > 25. How many physical cores does your Lenovo X201 have? If you have just 2, you might be hit by bug 1166664. In this case, try the kernel from https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/tiwai:/bsc1166664-p3/standard/.
So, Mr Kruger, this was clearly a "Krugerrand" suggestion. Real gold! uname -a Linux roadrunner.suse 5.3.18-lp152.1.g477312f-default #1 SMP Fri Mar 20 19:58:58 UTC 2020 (477312f) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux worked like charm. So this is probably a duplicate of 1166664.
(In reply to Stakanov Schufter from comment #4) > So, Mr Kruger, this was clearly a "Krugerrand" suggestion. Real gold! Your are welcome. Glad to hear that it works. > uname -a > Linux roadrunner.suse 5.3.18-lp152.1.g477312f-default #1 SMP Fri Mar 20 > 19:58:58 UTC 2020 (477312f) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > worked like charm. > > So this is probably a duplicate of 1166664. I am still puzzled about the X250, which according to comment 2 does not seem to be affected, even though it has only two physical cores.
Created attachment 834894 [details] KDE app giving core indications. (In reply to Frank Kruger from comment #5) > (In reply to Stakanov Schufter from comment #4) > > So, Mr Kruger, this was clearly a "Krugerrand" suggestion. Real gold! > > Your are welcome. Glad to hear that it works. > > > uname -a > > Linux roadrunner.suse 5.3.18-lp152.1.g477312f-default #1 SMP Fri Mar 20 > > 19:58:58 UTC 2020 (477312f) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > > > worked like charm. > > > > So this is probably a duplicate of 1166664. > > I am still puzzled about the X250, which according to comment 2 does not > seem to be affected, even though it has only two physical cores. If I comment on that, take it as the "unwashed masses". Could it be that this is given by the way how early Core i5 did handle hyperthreading? There are a lot of weirdo things e.g. in KDE were I am shown three cores and 4 threads.... (I join a screenshot). But it is only a guess. If it would be useful to you, I can post dmidecode of this (X201) machine and ask that user to post the dmidecode taken with the liveCD on the TP250 that works.
(In reply to Stakanov Schufter from comment #6) > Created attachment 834894 [details] > KDE app giving core indications. > > (In reply to Frank Kruger from comment #5) > > (In reply to Stakanov Schufter from comment #4) > > > So, Mr Kruger, this was clearly a "Krugerrand" suggestion. Real gold! > > > > Your are welcome. Glad to hear that it works. > > > > > uname -a > > > Linux roadrunner.suse 5.3.18-lp152.1.g477312f-default #1 SMP Fri Mar 20 > > > 19:58:58 UTC 2020 (477312f) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > > > > > worked like charm. > > > > > > So this is probably a duplicate of 1166664. > > > > I am still puzzled about the X250, which according to comment 2 does not > > seem to be affected, even though it has only two physical cores. > > If I comment on that, take it as the "unwashed masses". Could it be that > this is given by the way how early Core i5 did handle hyperthreading? > There are a lot of weirdo things e.g. in KDE were I am shown three cores and > 4 threads.... (I join a screenshot). But it is only a guess. Might be. Leaving this to the kernel experts. Could you please provide the output of 'turbostat --interval 1 sleep 0' for X201 and post it at bug 1166664? Thx.
Dup of bug 1166664. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1166664 ***